Among the many nasty anti-gay comments Sally Kern made was that "gays are infiltrating city councils," including that of Pittsburgh. The Pittsburgh city fathers have a slightly different view of the gay menance and Douglas A. Shields, President of the Pittsburgh City Council sent Ms. Kern a rather strongly worded letter. I am still at a loss as to how an elected official like Kern can be so consumed by hate and intolerane. Perhaps Ms. Kern should move to Iran where as a woman she'd find out what it's like to have religious fanatics limit one's rights. I surely will not book any trips to Oklahoma any time soon. Here are some highlights via Pam's House Blend (http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4774):

Ms. Kern:

Today I listened to your remarks (http://www.victoryfund.org/listening. ) related to your views on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people (GLBT). I was thoroughly disgusted by what you had to say and astonished that someone who presumably took an oath of office to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the laws of this nation would espouse hateful, bigoted and un-American views.

I sit here in my office and only wonder who else might be on your "less equal" list. I also wonder, if we should follow your illogic, what it is we should do about this "threat" to the nation? Round them up and put them in extermination camps? How would you have us "cut out this cancer" assuming we do away with our Constitution and Bill of Rights and host of other civil rights we enjoy in this free and democratic nation?

Your remarks, whether you know it are not, provided an incredible display of ignorance and intolerance. You incite others to cause harm and even death to those who are of the GLBT community. New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned his office for far less an offense than the ones you committed in your remarks. I would hope that you too would recognize your offense and do likewise - resign.

As the President of the Council of the City of Pittsburgh, I require an apology from you for your senseless, mean spirited attack on one my colleagues and the Council as a whole. I would think, should you take the time to reflect upon your hateful, bigoted words. An apology is also in order to the GLBT community, their families and their friends. Short of a a miracle, I do not expect that you will. I find persons of your ilk completely blind to your ignorance.

A gay teenager who faces the death penalty if he is forced to return to Iran has won a temporary reprieve after the Home Secretary halted his planned deportation and agreed to reconsider his case. The Government's surprise intervention yesterday follows an international outcry over the plight of Mehdi Kazemi, 19, who lost his asylum claim in Britain even though his former boyfriend had been arrested by the Iranian state police and executed for sodomy.

Announcing the decision to rehear Mr Kazemi's case, the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, said yesterday: "Following representations made on behalf of Mehdi Kazemi, and in the light of new circumstances since the original decision was made, I have decided that Mr Kazemi's case should be reconsidered on his return to the UK from the Netherlands."

The Liberal Democrat European justice spokeswoman, the MEP Baroness Sarah Ludford, said: "This is a welcome move, even if it should have come voluntarily and without the need for so much pressure. But we must not forget other gay Iranians fearing for not only their liberty but their lives, such as Pegah Emambakhsh [an Iranian lesbian who is seeking asylum in Britain]. They deserve justice, too."

Mr Kazemi came to London to study in 2005, but in April 2006 discovered that his gay partner had been arrested by the Iranian authorities and named him as his boyfriend before his execution. Fearing he might suffer the same fate if he returned home after his studies, Mr Kazemi decided to seek asylum in Britain.

The battle between Lisa Miller-Jenkins and her former partner, Janet Miller-Jenkins, over the visitation rights granted to Janet Miller-Jenkins by a Vermont Court continues to rage. The birth mother, Lisa Miller-Jenkins, had previously moved to Virginia to try to cynically use Virginia's anti-gay laws to sever the visitation rights duly granted in Vermont where the two women had entered into a legal civil union. Now, Lisa claims she is no longer lesbian and is being aided by Liberty Counsel - a Christianist wing nut legal organization - and has tried once again to have the Vermont court's order overridden without success. She had previously failed to convince the Virginia appellate courts to disregard the long standing tradition of enforcing child custody rulings entered by courts in other states. I am glad that the Vermont Supreme Court refused to reopen the case. Here are some highlights from 365gay.com (http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/03/031408vt.htm):

(Montpelier, Vermont) Vermont's Supreme Court declined Friday to review its earlier ruling in a nasty four year battle between two women over visitation rights to the young daughter of one of the women. "There is no new evidence or facts to consider that would affect our prior legal conclusions," the justices said in a written decision, allowing to stand its order that Janet Miller-Jenkins had visitation rights to the daughter born to her former partner Lisa Miller-Jenkins.The lengthy war between the two women has involved the high courts of both Vermont and Virginia, with the US Supreme Court refusing to become involved.

When the relationship between the two women soured and they split up, a judge in Vermont gave Janet Miller-Jenkins temporary visitation rights with the child. Lisa Miller-Jenkins fled with her daughter to Virginia which has some of the most anti-gay legislation in the country. She then declared she was no longer a lesbian, hired a conservative Christian law firm, the Liberty Counsel, and went to court in Virginia seeking sole custody of the child. Janet Miller-Jenkins fought the application on the grounds that the case was already before the court in Vermont.

In 2006 the Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that the state of Vermont has jurisdiction in the case, and threw out Prosser's ruling. The Appeals Court ruling was upheld by the Virginia Supreme Court. Last year the Vermont Supreme Court unanimously concluded that "under well-established laws designed to protect children and families" the Vermont Family Court properly ordered visitation between Janet and her daughter. Liberty Counsel appealed to the US Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case.

I received an e-mail from a reader who gave me a link to a post he did concerning the recent flap over Reverend Jeremiah Wright who has now resigned from involvement with the Obama campaign due to various inflamatory and disparaging remarks he has made. The post can be found here: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/malikgravespryor/gGBzv2. I believe Malik does a good job in looking at the conflicted feelings Obama may hve about Wright which by no means indicates the Obama agrees with or supports Wright's views. I would encourage readers to check out the post. As he points out the Rev. Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama. He baptized his children. He guided Barack Obama to Christianity and took him into the community when he came to Chicago. Thus, it is difficult to reject the person whom has played a role in important benchmarks that occur in one's life.

More importantly, Malik also discusses the conflict many gays encounter in coming to terms with who they are and their sexual orientation versus the religious environment in which they were raised. Malik dealt with the conflict in one way by leaving Christianity, while others such as myself often struggle still at times with reconciling one's faith and the all too often hatefilled anti-gay Christian community. A number of things that he says resonate with me having been raised in a conservative Catholic environment and ultimately walking away from that faith tradition. Here are some highlights:

I grew up in the Christian faith at the Emanuel Temple Church in Brooklyn, NY under District Elder, and Pastor, Tommy Lee Seals. As someone who had a childhood filled with many good father figures, but never that singular father, Pastor Seals provided me with much guidance on my path toward adulthood.

It is one of the reasons that walking away from the Christian faith was so difficult for me. It felt, in a way, walking away from my relationship with him. While growing up, I realized that I was different than others around me. When the other boys were talking about the girls that were developing in front of their eyes, I was instead looking at them. And it terrified me. The Pentecostal denomination of the Christian faith is not one that is particularly forgiving when it comes to homosexuality. Neither is the black community at large.

I listened to the sermons of the man I looked up to, sermons that in many memorable cases demonized gay people. I listened with growing horror and self-loathing at my burgeoning feelings as I entered and progressed through puberty, hearing speech of "those people" who were destined for hell. "Those people" who should never be allowed near children. "Those people" who fornicated in filth and were no better than gutter trash. In light of these sermons and my own readings of the Bible, as well as my strongly held belief that you cannot cherry pick your faith simply to fit the particulars of your individual life, that I walked away from Christianity.

Despite my burgeoning problems with the orthodoxy surrounding the nature of faith and the calls to accept it blindly and without question, it was truly my sexuality that finally pushed me to walk away. It was, in the end, the tipping point. I could either go insane as a closeted gay man in an anti-gay, anti-me faith, or I could walk away from my faith and answer the questions I had about it, regardless of sexuality. And yet, despite the trauma of growing up gay in the black community, in the incendiary Pentecostal faith, could I curse the man who I saw as a father figure then, and hope would see me as an accomplished young man today? Who would look at the sum of my life and pronounce himself proud of me?

I left Christianity at 17yrs old, 13 years ago. And yet, the answer to that question has to be unequivocally no. Despite all of my disagreements with the Christian faith, whether it be on homosexuality, the validity of other belief systems, science, and many other topics. Despite all of the psychological pain I endured, it would be exceedingly difficult to do what Barack Obama is in the process of doing today.

NEW YORK, March 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The American Psychoanalytic Association (APsaA) has issued a position statement supporting the legal recognition of same-sex civil marriage while opposing discrimination against same-sex couples. In recognition that gay and lesbian couples are raising children and possess the same potential and desire for life-long relationships as their heterosexual counterparts, the APsaA seeks to assist in ending the government-sanctioned discrimination against homosexual couples that denies them over 1,000 federal rights and benefits.

We want people to think about the broad impact the denial of same-sex marriage has on Americans today, says Ethan Grumbach, Ph.D., chair of APsaA's Committee on Gay and Lesbian Issues. Families exist in many different ways and it is important for same-sex couples to have legal and societal recognition of their unions for themselves, their children, and their extended families.

Gay and lesbian couples are being denied the right to marry in this country on the basis of false scientific testimony, says Gary Grossman, Ph.D., member and former chair of APsaAs Committee on Gay and Lesbian Issues. As experts on emotional experience, the membership of the American Psychoanalytic Association has an obligation to clarify its position that same-sex marriage offers substantial mental health benefits for the nations gays and lesbians and their loved ones, and the denial of marriage has psychologically detrimental consequences.

Like many gay bloggers, I have done a number of posts on the still changing story on the extreme anti-gay comments made by Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern. Perhaps I should have seen it coming, but now stories are flying about that Sally Kern may have a gay son herself. A son that she has reportedly disowned. While Jesse Kern has denied that he is gay (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080314_1__OKLAH67120), it would certainly fit a pattern where some of the most outspoken anti-gay bigots are themselves the parents of gay children. A few that spring to mind are Phyllis Schlafly, Beverly LeHaye, Alan Keyes, Randall Terry (there are many more). The irony of course is that according to these homophobes, homosexuality is the result of dysfunctional families and poor parental relationships. Thus if their theory were true, these folks should be the last ones giving advice to others about how to avoid raising children who turn out to be gay. They failed with their own children by their own standards. Why on earth trust them with yours?

I suspect that time will tell if Jesse Kern’s denial is true. It does seem strange, however, that Kern changed her homepage to delete references to her children. Most GOP politicians ALWAYS mention their children - to document that they are married with children and, therefore, cannot be gay or lesbian . However, in the interim, here are highlights from Queerity (http://www.queerty.com/sally-kern-scrubs-gay-son-20080312/):

The Oklahoma lawmaker’s homophobic remarks have been the talk of the town recently, especially her assertion that gay folk are infiltrating schools to indoctrinate children. And, sensing a critical national spotlight, Kern made a very suspicious change to her official government homepage. If you compare a March 4th cache and today’s version, you’ll notice that Kern and/or her staff deleted a biographical sentence mentioning her two adult sons, Jesse and Nathan. Obviously our warning bells went off, so we did a little digging and found something quite queer.

Consider comment seventeen on this Tulsa World article: “How come no-one asks this “supposed” christian woman..about her own GAY son? The one she basically has dis-owned…ahh so christian.” What?! Kern and her Baptist preacher hubbie had a homo? And they disowned him? That’s some Alan Keyes shit. A little more digital detective work dug up numerous postings naming Jesse as the outcast offspring. One even recalls Jesse’s time at Oklahoma Baptist University, where he was apparently “the biggest queen on campus”: I find it hilarious that Salacious Sally is such a bigot. Her son Jesse was the biggest queen on the campus of OBU in the mid-90’s. Twice he almost was expelled for making inappropriate advances in the library toilets. When he wasn’t cruising the toilets he was in the glee club and a piano major…there’s your sign.

NOTE: based on a comment on the Tulsa World article, I did a OCIS search and found the following which I have no way of confirming is the same Jesse Kern as Ms. Sally's son. Given his reported age currently, it's probably not him - perhaps a relative then:

John Aravosis has a post on America Blog that bears reading (http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/25-of-hillary-supporters-would-vote-for.html) because it shows the lengths that she will go to defeat Obama - and the Democrat ticket in November if it does include her. Basically, if she can be the nominee, she wants the party to lose: I suspect so that she can run again in 2012 after McCain's one term presidency. The woman is totally self centered and - let's be blunt - a BITCH. Perhaps being married to Bill does that to a person, but it would be nice if she'd look beyond herself for a moment. Throughout this campaign she has succeed in reminding me of everything sleazy about the Clintons and why the thought of them back in the White House makes me physically ill. She is alienating the black vote, promoting McCain, and engaging in precisely the nasty, underhanded politics that turns voters off and makes them avoid participating in politics. Here are some highlights from John's post:

I've received a lot of emails and comments like this from Hillary supporters. A recent PEW poll shows that 10% of Democrats who support Obama would defect and vote for McCain should Hillary become the candidate. But, a whopping 25% of Democrats who support Hillary would defect and vote for McCain should Obama become the candidate.Are one quarter of Hillary's supporters racists? (Latte-drinkers not looking so bad, after all, eh?) Have they simply bought in to Hillary's incessant message that Obama, the possible Democratic candidate in the fall, is much less qualified than McCain? It's probably a mixture of both.

Someone in the party (and the media) needs to ask Hillary what her plan is to get those 25% back should she not win the nomination. Hillary can only tell Democratic voters so many times that McCain is more qualified to be president than Obama before her supporters (and lots more Americans) end up listening to her. Or is that her plan after all? If Hillary can't win, then no Democrat deserves to win?

As I had previously posted, most of the bills that would be beneficial to gays that were introduced in the Virginia General Assembly went down in defeat at the hands of the Christo-fascist elements within the General Assembly. One bill did survive, however, which should strengthen the ability of LGBT couples to make sure their medical powers of attorney and advanced medical directives (a/k/a living wills) are honored. The majority of the hospitals in the greater Norfolk area - save and except the Catholic run hospitals - already generally recogize properly executed and notarized advanced medical directives and medical powers of attorney. I know from my own experience that Sentara Norfolk General honored my documents naming my then partner as my attorney-in-fact. The registry to be established would make it easier for health care providers to verify the existence of proper documentation, particularly in instances where for some reason a copy of the documents were not available. Here are some highlights from the Washington Blade's story (http://www.washingtonblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=17149):

Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine (D) recently signed into law a bill that would set up a medical registry giving gay couples more authority in making decisions for partners in case of medical emergencies. Kaine signed the bill, House Bill 805, on March 4. The law is expected to go into effect July 1. The measure would set up a state registry for living wills and advanced medical directives. Although it is not specifically aimed at helping gays, it would enable those in same-sex relationships to designate their partner as the person who would make medical decisions on their behalf.

Rep. David Englin (D-Alexandria), the sponsor of the bill, said the law will be “an instrument to provide equal legal protection to all Virginians, including gay and lesbian couples, during medical emergencies.” "While all Virginians can benefit from this registry, in particular it will enable gay and lesbian Virginians to designate their partners as the people to make medical decisions on their behalf — a legal power married couples enjoy by default,” he said.

Once again, other nations are moving forward with progressive legislation that grants rights to LGBT citizens. The latest country moving to allow full marriage rights is Norway as reported by 365gay.com (http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/03/031408nor.htm). Meanwhile, the province of Victoria in Australia has voted to permit LGBT couples to register as domestic partners. Sadly, here in the USA we have the likes of bigots like Sally Kern not only maligning gay relationaships by gays as an entire category of citizens. In fact, I would venture to guess that if Ms. Kern had her way, gays would lose their citizenship and be headed towards extermination camps. Here are highlights from 365gay.com:

(Oslo) The Norwegian government on Friday introduced legislation allowing same-sex couples to marry and have joint custody over children. The country already allows gay and lesbian couples to enter into civil partnerships, but LGBT rights groups have long complained the law does not go far enough and has created two classes of citizenship - one for heterosexuals the other for gays.

The new legislation amends the definition of civil marriage to make it gender neutral. It also says that when a lesbian who is married to another women becomes pregnant through in vitro the partner will have all the rights of parenthood "from the moment of conception". The legislation additionally states that in cases of adoption, both partners, gay or lesbian, would have complete joint parenting rights.

Family Issues minister Anniken Huitfeldt in introducing the bill called it "an historic step towards equality." She also had a message for some members of Parliament who claimed the bill would weaken tradition marriage. "The new law won't weaken marriage as an institution," Huitfeldt told Parliament. "Rather, it will strengthen it. Marriage won't be worth less because more can take part in it."

About 85 percent of Norway's 4.7 million people are registered as members of the state Lutheran Church of Norway, although far fewer are active. The church is split on the issue of gay marriage, and was likely to allow each congregation to decide whether to conduct homosexual weddings, as it did last year in allowing parishes to decide whether to accept clergymen living in gay partnerships.

GAY and de facto couples will be able to formally register their relationships in Victoria after the Legislative Assembly last night passed historic legislation that split the Coalition. Liberal leader Ted Baillieu supported the Government bill, which will allow couples to record their relationships with the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriage.

Mr Baillieu said he did not support the concept of gay marriage, but he was in favour of measures to help people manage their relationships, when they are together and when they are separating. "The Parliament should always preserve to itself the opportunity to legislate in particular areas in favour of marriage and the role and responsibility of raising and nurturing children," he said. "But that should not diminish our capacity to assist others and other relationships."

The bill will be passed in the upper house, with Labor, the Greens and several Liberals certain to support it. Mr Ryan said the beauty of a free vote — which Labor did not allow its MPs — was that people could express their personal views and vote accordingly.

If any further proof was needed that the GOP is the party of hatred and intolerance, the Oklahoma Legislature’s Republican caucus has refused to condemn Rep. Sally Kern (R) for saying – among other bigoted anti-gay remarks – that gays pose a greater danger to the United States than terrorists. Here are some highlights from 365gay.com (http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/03/031208ok.htm):

Thousands of emails have flooded into the state mailboxes of lawmakers demanding an apology but House Speaker Chris Benge (R) tells the Oklahoman newspaper that he has no plans to punish Kern. Democrats want a House committee to investigate the remarks to determine if a censure is warranted. Benge says no. "We're not putting a committee together, no," he told the Oklahoman. Asked by the paper if Kern's remarks represent the House GOP caucus Benge said, "Each member has their own opinion, there's no way that I can say whether that reflects the rest of the Republican caucus or not."

These folks call themselves Christian, yet the one hallmark of their mindset is a hatred of those who are different. Is this what Ms. Kern’s preacher husband teaches at his church (pictured above)? What kind of cruel and vicious God do these people worship?

Meanwhile, as reported by Pam’s House Blend, among the letters sent to Kern is one from a high school student named Tucker (http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4756) who lost his mother in the Murrah Federal Building bombing in 1995. The full letter can be found on Pam’s blog, and it is obvious that this 18 year old has far more Christian love, common sense and decency than uber-bigot/moron Sally Kern. Perhaps he should run for Ms. Kern’s seat. But no, he wants to get the Hell out of Oklahoma – I cannot say that I blame him if Ms. Kern is typical of Oklahomans. Here are some highlights from Tucker’s letter:

Rep Kern:

On April 19, 1995, in Oklahoma City a terrorist detonated a bomb that killed my mother and 167 others. 19 children died that day. Had I not had the chicken pox that day, the body count would've likely have included one more. Over 800 other Oklahomans were injured that day and many of those still suffer through their permanent wounds. That terrorist was neither a homosexual or was he involved in Islam. He was an extremist Christian forcing his views through a body count. He held his beliefs and made those who didn't live up to them pay with their lives.

As you were not a resident of Oklahoma on that day, it could be explained why you so carelessly chose words saying that the homosexual agenda is worst than terrorism. I can most certainly tell you through my own experience that is not true. I am sure there are many people in your voting district that laid a loved one to death after the terrorist attack on Oklahoma City. I kind of doubt you'll find one of them that will agree with you.

I've spent 12 years in Oklahoma public schools and never once have I had anyone try to force a gay agenda on me. I have seen, however, many gay students beat up and there's never a day in school that has went by when I haven't heard the word **** slung at someone. I've been called gay slurs many times and they hurt and I am not even gay so I can just imagine how a real gay person feels. You were a school teacher and you have seen those things too. How could you care so little about the suffering of some of your students?

Let me tell you the result of your words in my school. Every openly gay and suspected gay in the school were having to walk together Monday for protection. They looked scared. They've already experienced enough hate and now your words gave other students even more motivation to sneer at them and call them names. Afterall, you are a teacher and a lawmaker, many young people have taken your words to heart. That happens when you assume a role of responsibility in your community. I seriously think before this week ends that some kids here will be going home bruised and bloody because of what you said.

I wish you could've met my mom. Maybe she could've guided you in how a real Christian should be acting and speaking. I have not had a mother for nearly 13 years now and wonder if there were fewer people like you around, people with more love and tolerance in their hearts instead of strife, if my mom would be here to watch me graduate from high school this spring. Now she won't be there. So I'll be packing my things and leaving Oklahoma to go to college elsewhere and one day become a writer and I have no intentions to ever return here. I have no doubt that people like you will incite crazy people to build more bombs and kill more people again.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America ("ELCA") released a new draft statement on human sexuality today. There will be churchwide discussions on the policy and a final vote on a final document in 2009. The entire document can be found and downloaded here: http://www.elca.org/faithfuljourney/draft/draftstatement.pdf. I gave the statement a very quick review. I would be lying if I did not say I was somewhat disappointed. The ELCA needs decide whether it is going to be fully gay affirming or not, although the statement does represent an incremental improvement from the past. Nonetheless, one is either pregnant or they are not. I saw the following as the most relevant portions of the statement in terms of the issue of gays in the church (emphasis is mine):

Same-gender committed relationships: This church recognizes that it is in relationships of life-long companionship and commitment with public accountability that both interpersonal and social trust may be nurtured. It is within committed binding relationships, lived out within community, that relational and physical intimacy may be expressed and may have the capacity to offer worth and value to society. This church understands and affirms that such relationships reflect God’s love for the world and the vocation to love the neighbor. . . .

It is only within the last decades that this church has begun to deal in a new way with the longing of same-gender persons to seek relationships of life-long companionship and commitment and to seek public accountability for those commitments. In response, this church has drawn deeply on its Lutheran heritage to dwell in Scripture and listen to the Word of God. This listening has brought biblical scholars, theologians, and rostered and lay persons to different conclusions. After many years of study and conversation, this church does not have consensus regarding loving and committed same-gender relationships. This church has committed itself to continuing to accompany one another in study, prayer, discernment, and pastoral care. . . .

This church, both those who regard same-gender sexual relationships as sinful and those who do not, calls for mutual respect in relationships and for guidance that seeks the good of each individual and of the community. Although this church lacks consensus, it encourages all people to live out their faith in the community of the baptized. Following previous decisions of this church, we call on congregations to welcome, care for and support same-gender-oriented people and their families, and to advocate for their legal protection. We believe that this church has a pastoral responsibility to all children of God. This includes pastoral response to those who are same-gender in their orientation and to those who are seeking counsel about their sexual self-understanding. . . .

In their pastoral response, some pastors and congregations will advocate repentance and celibacy. Other pastors and congregations will call our same-gender-oriented brothers and sisters in Christ to establish relationships that are chaste, mutual, monogamous, and lifelong. These relationships are to be held to the same rigorous standards and sexual ethics as all others. Further, they will encourage same-gender couples to model their relationships according to the teachings of the Small and Large Catechisms pertaining to the sixth commandment. This suggests that dissolution of a committed same-gender relationship be treated with the same gravity as the dissolution of a marriage.

All congregations should seek to be safe and welcoming places to discuss sexual issues. All such conversations should include those most affected. The mission and ministry of congregations should be visibly open to all, including single adults, cohabiting adults, adults approaching marriage, families undergoing dissolution, single parents, blended families, and same-sex couples. As a matter of service and outreach, congregations should consciously and conscientiously shape their mission in response to the needs of all. Children and youth and those who bear special burdens deserve particular care.

This church understands that responsible action requires both ethics and discernment. The work of moral discernment is an important dimension of this church’s identity. It is carried on by all members of the ELCA community and is lived out best when all participate as full members of this community. We come as we are—teens, young adults, middle-aged adults, and mature adults; single, married, divorced, and partnered; straight and gay; right, left, and center—with a good will and, in Paul’s words, a heart “widened” by God’s mercy (2 Corinthians 6:11-13).

To me, it looks like the Task Force for all its “church speak” is still trying to avoid addressing the existence of gays head on and making a statement that ALL legitimate medical and mental health experts determine sexual orientation to be innate and unchangeable, so therefore, flat earth believers need to get with it and come into the 21st Century. Apparently, church unity is still more important than principle and doing what is right. It reminds me of the discussions in the first half of the 1800’s when a number of churches did not have the moral integrity to flat out say that just because the Bible tells slaves to obey their masters that did not make slavery OK.

In short, I believe the statement as currently drafted will do very little to make gays feel welcome or wanted. Yes, it is light years ahead of say the Southern Baptisit Convention or the Roman Catholic Church, but it still does not accomplish enough, in my view, to make ALL Lutherans, including gays, fully welcome. It certainly doesn’t make me feel any more welcome than before I read it. If some pastors and congregations are still free to condemn and call gays sinful, that is the real message to gays.

A reader referred me to this story (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/did-ohio-crosso.html) which looks at a phenomenon that has happened in a number of states, including Virginia based on what some Republican friends told me themselves: they voted for Hillary in the Democrat primary because - as encouraged to do so by Rush Limbaugh - they see Hillary as the more easily defeated Democrat in November and, therefore, want her to be the Democratic Party nominee. and voted for her to reduce Obama's results.

The difference is that in Virginia, unlike Ohio, no one has to register to vote by part affiliation. You only get to vote in one party's primary, but are free to pick which party each time there is a primary. Not so in Ohio and in some other states. In fact, in Ohio, changing primaries for such a purpose is a criminal offense and punishable by a fine of $2,500. Yet apparently, a number of Ohio Republicans are talking about the fact that they did exactly that. Thus, the question becomes: did Hillary really win among DEMOCRAT voters. Remember, Bill Clinton went on the Limbaugh show just prior to the Texas and Ohio primaries. Here are some highlights:

It seems that some Republican voters have bragged online that they voted Democratic ballots in the Ohio March 4th primary in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election. Essentially, they wanted to help Hillary Clinton win the Democratic nomination over Barack Obama because they think she's the weaker candidate and would lose against Republican John McCain in November.

The so-called Republican "plot" was instigated by conservative radio talker Rush Limbaugh (at right) who urged Republican voters in Ohio and Texas before the election to cross over for the primary to rig the nomination for the November election. Voters in those states could do this at the last minute because their local election laws allow voters to change party affiliation at the polls.

Ohio's revised election code includes an election falsification clause (Revised Code 3513.20), which says that if a voter who changes parties is challenged by poll workers as to the sincerity of his change of heart and also signs an affidavit stating that he supports the principles of the party to which he's changing -- when in fact he doesn't support them -- then he would be committing election falsification. Election falsification is a felony that is punishable by six to twelve months in jail and a $2,500 fine.

It's clear that cross-over voting occurred in large numbers in Ohio this year. The Ohio secretary of state's office doesn't have statistics yet on how many voters crossed parties in the primary (it's still compiling them), but the Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting that in Cuyahoga County alone, the state's largest county, at least 16,000 Republicans switched parties for the primary. The statewide numbers of cross-over voters could be large, since the secretary of state's office reports that the number of Democratic ballots cast in this primary as opposed to the number cast in the 2004 presidential primary increased by nearly a million, or 76 percent. (In comparison, the number of Republican ballots cast this year increased by only about 100,000, or 11 percent. These numbers do not include absentee, provisional and overseas ballots, which are still being counted.)

Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern is not alone in her perverted application of allegedly Christian beliefs. On Tuesday the Charlotte-Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, School Board adopted a new anti-bullying policy for all grade levels in the school division. One would think that a policy aimed at protecting children from abuse and bullying would receive unanimous approval, but NOT when gay-hating, sanctimonious "Christians" are on the scene. As the Charlotte Observer reports ( http://www.charlotte.com/408/story/532543.html), Christian conservatives urged the board not to, voicing concerns that the policy will promote homosexuality. How sick: apparently they want their freedom to ridicule, abuse, bully, beat up and perhaps even kill those nasty little homos within the school system. Here is the main text of the policy these "Christians" found offensive:

It is the policy of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education to maintain learning environments that are free from harassment or bullying. This freedom includes ...freedom from harassment or bullying based on an individual's real or perceived race, color, sex, religion, creed, political belief, age, national origin, linguistic or language differences, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, socioeconomic status, height, weight, physical characteristics, marital status, parental status, or physical, mental, or sensory disability.

It shall be a violation of this policy for any student, teacher, administrator, other school personnel, or any third party ... to harass or bully any person based upon any differences of status including, but not limited to, those listed above. It shall also be a violation of this policy for any teacher, administrator or other school personnel to tolerate such harassment or bullying.

Seems like a pretty tame and straight forward policy, but not for board member Kaye McGarry who apparently needs to move to Sally Kern's district in Oklahoma. Here are some other highlights fro the Observer's story on the school board meeting [note McGarry's comments]:

More than two-thirds of those who spoke at the hearing favored the new policy. As critics of the policy spoke, dozens of the students, many of them active with campus diversity councils, held up yellow "Vote Yes" and "Stop Bullying Now" signs. The students, who also wore yellow T-shirts as a sign of solidarity, said bullying is too prevalent and too emotionally scarring for the board not to take action.

Sharon Walker, a counselor at Providence High, said that in a student survey of the campus earlier this year, more than 80 percent of respondents said they heard anti-gay slurs several times a day. "One of the biggest concerns I hear from students is that the anti-gay bullying is happening right in front of teachers," she said. The teachers "say they are afraid of being accused of promoting a pro-gay agenda if they intervene."

But the policy's specific protection of sexual orientation and "gender identity/expression" drew opposition from critics like Ante Pavkovic, who quoted the Bible and questioned what teachers will tell children about gender identity. David Benham told the board that Christian values require him to take a stand against bullying. "I'm for the anti-bullying policy," he said. "I'm just not for the agenda that seeks to institutionalize itself through this policy."

But after more than two hours of impassioned arguments from more than 40 speakers, the board approved the policy on a 6-3 vote. Kaye McGarry, Ken Gjertsen and Larry Gavreau opposed it. Students in the audience greeted passage of the policy with cheers and a standing ovation. Earlier, McGarry proposed an anti-bullying policy that didn't include specific protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. That policy failed on a 6-3 vote, with Gjertsen and Gavreau joining her in the minority. "This policy is not about education, it's about indoctrination," McGarry said. Voices for, against Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools measure

I have long maintained that the real purpose behind the ex-gay "ministries" is political and NOT to help "support for individuals who want to recover from homosexuality." It is absolutely critical to the Christianist agenda to deprive LGBT citizens of legal protections that sexual orientation be view and constantly marketed to the public as a choice. Once the general public understands that one's sexual orientation is not changeable, it becomes much harder to urge elected officials to vote against non-discrimination laws and the like. As Ex-gay Watch has revealed via a Boston Globe story (http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/2008/03/exodus-will-remain-a-member-of-the-arlington-group/), Exodus International, which describes itself as "the largest Christian referral and information network dealing with homosexual issues in the world," is in fact a member of the Arlington Group, which has a clearly poltical motivation, and hasno intention of withdrawing. Here's a description of the Arlington Group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington_Group):

The Arlington Group is a coalition which unites the leaders of almost all of the most prominent Christian Right organizations in the United States. Founded in 2002 principally through the efforts of American Family Association President Donald Wildmon and Free Congress Foundation Chairman Paul Weyrich, the group seeks to establish consensus goals and strategy among its members and translate its combined constituency into an overwhelming force within the Republican Party, particularly at its highest levels. Its membership and purpose overlaps to a high degree with the Council for National Policy; but the group is much more narrowly focused, choosing to emphasize such issues as same-sex marriage, abortion, and confirmation of like-minded federal judges.

Obviously, if Exodus International's goal is only a charitable ministry to help individuals, why the involvement in the Arlington Group? A review of the Arlington Group's membership makes it very clear that raw political power and a policy of intimidation to further the Christianist agenda is the organization's sole purpose. Thus, was Alan Chamber’s recent announcement that Exodus has “decided to back out of policy issues,” concerned that they “might be alienating people that simply wouldn’t call [them] for help because of the perception that [they] were becoming a partisan and political organization rather than a ministry for all" a lie? It would seem so.

Combine this situation and the recently release by the American Psychological Association and co-sponsors of a booklet making it VERY clear that reparative therapy and ex-gay programs are unethical for mental health and health care professionals just underscores Alan Chambers' dishonesty. Exodus is a fradualent organization perpetrating a fraud on the uninformed and unwary. Of course, in the process Chambers makes money peddling books, receiving speaking engagements, etc.

Pam Spaulding has a lengthy update on the Sally Kern debacle and a good deal of information which can be found here: (http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=7C2A2ED54EA11A80569DB57ED48763BF?diaryId=4745). One great point that Pam makes is that the business community and Oklahoma City - which is in Kern's district - Chamber of Commerce and Convention Bureau need to be aware that Kern's bigoted views are NOT acceptable to most people, particularly business people and event planners from other areas. There is contact information for some of those who need to hear that Ms. Kern has done serious damage to the image of their city and region. Here is a portion of Pam's excellent post:

We should politely and rationally point out that Rep. Kern's POV as the city's representative of state government isn't exactly creating a business climate to attract $$$ to the city, or create a quality of life for its LGBT citizens when hate is fomented. This isn't about free speech. It's about the consequences of a public official creating a dehumanizing climate for any LGBT employees of forward-thinking, successful businesses that might want to relocate there who would be paying taxes to enrich the city's coffers.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

I find it unbelievable that the Netherlands will not grant asylum to Mehdi Kazemi, age 19, who fears he will be executed if forced to return to Iran. The same goes for the United Kingdom. Based on all the well founded reports of gays being executed in Iran, even those under age and in violation of international treaties. One can only wonder what the Hell is enough to show that asylum is need. As ABC News is reporting (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4413302&page=1), Kazemi’s boyfriend has already been executed by hanging. The denial by the Netherlands and the mealy mouthed talk by the British Home Office are shocking. Here are some story highlights:

While studying English and science in the U.K., Kazemi learned that his boyfriend had been executed for sodomy back in Iran. His father told him the boyfriend had confessed to Iranian authorities that Kazemi was his lover. The authorities, Kazemi found out, had already been to his parents' house with a warrant for his arrest. "I was very scared," Kazemi wrote in a letter accompanying his request for asylum in Britain and published in full on the website of the Canada-based Iranian Queer Organization. "I wish to inform secretary of state that I did not come to the UK to claim asylum … But in the past few months my situation back home has changed. The Iranian authorities have found out that I am a homosexual and they are looking for me."

A British judge denied Kazemi's request for asylum in 2006 on the grounds that Iran does not systematically persecute homosexuals. But Kazemi, terrified at the prospect of being handed over to Iranian authorities after his application for asylum was denied, fled the country. After a journey that sent him through the Czech Republic and Germany, he is now in The Netherlands, where he is being held in detention while a Dutch court decides whether the country is obliged to hand him back over to Britain under a treaty that says refugees can only request asylum in one European Union country.

Pegah Emambakhsh, a 40-year-old lesbian woman who fled Iran for Britain in 2005 also faces deportation to Iran after being denied asylum. Emambakhsh's partner is currently awaiting execution by stoning in Iran.

Homosexuality is a capital crime in the Islamic Republic of Iran. According to one estimate by gay rights activists, more than 4,000 homosexual men and women have been executed in Iran since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Both Kazemi's and Emambakhsh's cases have caused a public and political uproar in Britain. According to the Independent, more than 60 British Members of the European Parliament have signed a petition asking Prime Minister Gordon Brown to overturn the judge's decision in Kazemi's appeal for amnesty.

I know a number of LGBT individuals who are fanatic Clinton supporters. To be honest, I do not understand their thinking. If nothing else, Bill and Hillary can be relied upon to do what is expedient for them in terms of winning votes or raising money. Unfortunately, other than in the form of lip service, loyalty to their supporters, particularly gays, is not their strong suit. It never has been. In this regard, Andrew Sullivan has a timely post (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/the-clintons--2.html#more) that looks at the cynical manner in which the Clintons have treated gays in the past and references John Aravosis’ research in the process (http://www.americablog.com/2007/06/bill-clinton-reportedly-told-john-kerry.html). Why gay voters think they can trust Hillary when Obama has better positions on gay issues is astounding to me. If you do not believe me, do some investigation of your own. Just remember that Hillary does not even reference that LGBT voters exist on her campaign website.Here are some highlights from Andrew’s post:

Many readers expressed disbelief at my claim that the Clintons ran anti-gay ads on Christian radio stations in 1996. Did I have proof? Actually, John Aravosis recently provided a very extensive round-up of what happened back then. It's all true. Here's an excerpt from a Log Cabin briefing at the time:

In an article in today's Washington Times, entitled "For Christian Radio, Clinton Changes Tune on Gays, Abortion," it was reported that the Clinton-Gore campaign "shrugged off" angry calls to shelve the radio ad. The article cited reports from gay and lesbian groups that the campaign might delete the portion of the ad which boasts of Clinton signing the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), but "Clinton campaign spokesman Joe Lockhart said there are no plans to alter the radio ads, which will run for 'a few more days.'" After boasting about Clinton signing the anti-gay DOMA, the ad concludes with the line: "President Clinton has fought for our values and America is better for it."

John also notes that Bill Clinton advised John Kerry to triangulate against gays in 2004. Kerry refused. But the Clintons have used gays in two ways since their careers began: to get money (an untapped resource that the Clintons shrewdly figured out early on), and to pivot to win red-state votes. Remember that the Clintons used this tactic in 1996 - not a close election, or one in which they even needed to gay-bait to win. But they did. It helped a little. And they knew the gays were pathetic enough to keep supporting them.

With the current controversy over the statements made by Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern, one sometimes might wonder how individuals can come to hold such ignorant, bigoted views of other human beings. Sadly, for the intellectually lazy and small minded, there are plenty of sources for them to parrot without the need to think. Thinking is something that truly terrifies the fundamentalists and uber-conservatives. Today’s World Net Daily, a/k/a Wingnut Daily, has a guest commentary which is a perfect example of the - dare I say DELIBERATELY untrue - messages that are regularly disseminated to fundie land by “pro-family” organizations and individuals like Richard Land at the Southern Baptist Convention. Since Sally Kern is married to a Baptist minister, I suspect she has heard these lies for years without ever questioning their truth.

Today’s commentary diatribe is by Janet Folger formerly with James Kennedy’s Coral Ridge Ministries and one who has made a career out of bashing gays. As is typical, most of her factual allegations are 100% untrue, which is par for the course with Ms. Folger. Like most of the self-righteous, self-proclaimed “Christians” who constantly wear their religion on their sleeve, Ms. Folger is especially challenged when it comes to matters of truth and veracity. She views herself as exempt from the Commandment against bearing false witness. It is very important for gays and fair minded individuals to know their enemy and their tactics to best counter against them. Ms. Folger is a case in point. Here are some highlights of the trash she is generating (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58600):

Since Anita Bryant got run over with the homosexual steamroller, things have only gotten worse. Don't believe me? Just ask the grandmothers who were arrested in Philadelphia for sharing their faith. "Hate crimes" legislation (which passed both the U.S. House and Senate last year –stopped only by a threat of a veto) would silence pastors in their pulpits and outlaw books like "The Criminalization of Christianity," whose subtitle is: "Read this Before it Becomes Illegal!" The "Employment Non-Discrimination Act" would put an "ENDA" to religious liberty in the workplace and, with its transgender amendment, threaten any business that would fire a man who came to work wearing a dress.

The textbooks in California are being rewritten to remove any references to "mom" and "dad" and revised to appear more like the Washington Blade or a homosexual newsletter. And now California courts are telling parents that it's illegal to homeschool or send their children to Christian and private schools that may have teachers without "state certification."

If B. Hussein Obama or Mrs. Clinton get elected, you can expect two to three justices on the Supreme Court to be replaced with 45-year-old rabid pro-abortion liberals who hate marriage and everything we believe. Then you can expect:

1. Thought crimes to become law and pastors to be arrested for the content of their sermons.

2. The silencing of Christian and conservative talk radio with the UnFairness Doctrine.

3. ENDA to bring an end to free speech in the workplace, shutting down business like Boston's Catholic Charities who wanted to place orphan children with a mom and a dad rather than with homosexual activists.

4. The Union Thug Law removing the secret ballot for union membership and delivering more coerced funds to the Democrat coffers then ever before.

If you want to protest, pick up a sign, but don't throw away your vote, because if Obama or Clinton get into the White House, we won't recognize our country four years from now.

I guess better late than never, but the mainstream media apparently is finally waking up to the fact that the continued refusal by Hillary Clinton to release tax returns for prior years is beginning to look suspicious. As I have stated before, those who have nothing improper to hide do not act the way Bill and Hillary Clinton are acting concerning their tax returns. I'm sorry, but I can only assume the worse, particularly in view of the spectacular rise in the Clinton's net worth over a relatively brief period. Here are highlights from ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4421457&page=1):

After weeks of intense pressure, and more than a year after announcing her presidential candidacy, Sen. Hillary Clinton has offered little explanation for why she has delayed releasing the tax returns made public by most other Democratic presidential candidates in recent years.

"What is the holdup?" said Sheila Krumholz of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit group that tracks the role of money in politics. "She hasn't exactly made it clear as to what process is making it so cumbersome to just release them." Past Democratic presidential candidates have set a precedent for releasing their tax returns before or during the primary season. Sen. John Kerry released his in December of 2003, and former Vice President Al Gore's were in the public domain while he was in office. Clinton's opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, released his 2006 return last April.

The lack of disclosure leaves the public with an obscure picture of how the Clintons have managed the multi-million-dollar fortune they have amassed since leaving the White House, say government watchdog groups. Personal financial disclosure filings, required by government ethics rules, only offer a broad glimpse of the Clintons' finances. Since 1999, the couple's net worth has increased from somewhere between $1.25 million and $5.7 million to between $10 million and $50 million, according to filings.

Tax forms would help fill in the blanks where the disclosure forms leave off, says Boyle, including exact amounts for income and stock gains and losses as well as details like how much was paid in mortgage interest, charitable deductions and personal exemptions taken. "In this very extended primary season and competitive environment where people are really struggling to weigh these two candidates, this would be helpful for people to know," said Boyle.

Of late, Bill and Hillary Clinton have been making suggestions that Barack Obama could be Hillary's vice presidential running mate for a "dream ticket." It may be Hillary's dream ticket since it's probably the only thing that might help her beat John McCain. But for Obama, I believe it would be a bad dream - a very bad dream, a nightmare in fact. Fortunately, Obama recognizes that fact and today said he would not take a VP slot with Hillary. Why should he? He's more electable. He is not tainted like Billary - and who knows what their still unreleased tax returns will show. He definitely does not benefit by being associated with Billary. In the worse case, he's better off waiting for another try rather than prostituting himself to the Clintons. Better yet, he wins the primary and the 2008 general election and Hillary and Bill will in effect never retake the White House. Here are some CNN story highlights (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/10/dems.campaign/index.html?iref=topnews):

(CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama Monday flatly rejected suggestions he would be a vice presidential running mate for Sen. Hillary Clinton. Obama forcefully shot that idea down. "Sen. Clinton is fighting hard. She's tenacious. I respect her for that. She is working hard to win the nomination. But I want everybody to be absolutely clear. I'm not running for vice president. I'm running for president of the United States of America," Obama told supporters during a rally in Columbus, Mississippi.

If anyone should be suggesting vice presidential candidates, it should be him, Obama said. "With all due respect. I won twice as many states as Sen. Clinton. I've won more of the popular vote than Sen. Clinton. I have more delegates than Sen. Clinton. So, I don't know how somebody who's in second place is offering vice presidency to the person who's in first place," he said. Obama also said the Clinton campaign was "hoodwinking" voters when it suggested he was not ready to be president while also floating the possibility of a joint Clinton-Obama ticket. "I don't understand," he said. "If I'm not ready, how is it that you think I should be such a great vice president?"

In his Sunday Times of London column (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article3510778.ece) , Andrew Sullivan did a masterful job at describing not only the relentlessness of Bill and Hillary Clinton, but also a good recap of why some Democrats are crazy to be still supporting them and giving Hillary ammunition to keep brutalizing her way towards the White House. I will admit it - I have Clinton fatgue already and the thought of the endless scandals and polarization a Hillary presidency would bring makes my stomach clench up. If this country is to move forard and see the absolutely crical reforms we need accomplished, Hillary needs to step aside for the good of the country. Unfortunately, she will not go out graciously. Here are some highlights:

The media are marvelling at the Clintons’ several near-death political experiences in this campaign. Hasn’t it occurred to them how creepily familiar all this is? The Clintons live off psychodrama. They both love to push themselves to the brink of catastrophe and then accomplish the last-minute, nail-biting self-rescue. Before too long the entire story becomes about them, their ability to triumph through crisis, even though the crises are so often manufactured by themselves. That is what last week brought back for me. The 1990s – with a war on.

Remember: Bill Clinton could have easily settled the Paula Jones lawsuit years before he put the entire country through the wringer (Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment alleged to have occurred while he was governor of Arkansas).

Recall: Hillary Clinton could have killed what turned out to be the White-water nonstory at the very outset by disclosing everything she could (the scandal centred on a controversial Arkansas property deal).

They have been thinking of this moment since they were in college and being a senator or an ex-president or having two terms in the White House are not sufficient to satiate their sense of entitlement. Even if they have to put their own party through a divisive, bitter, possibly fatal death match, they will never give up.Their country, their party . . . none of this matters compared with them. The secrecy and paranoia endure too. Releasing tax returns is routine for a presidential candidate. Barack Obama did it some time back. The Clintons still haven’t – and say they won’t for more than another month. Why? They have no explanation. They seem affronted by the question.

The Clintons are comfortable with this polarisation. They need it. Even when running against a fellow Democrat, they instinctively reach for it. Last week, in response to the Obama camp’s request that they release their tax returns, Clinton’s spokesman called Obama a new Ken Starr. For the Clintons, all Democrats who oppose them are . . . Republicans. And all Republicans are evil. And evil means that anything the Clintons do in self-defence is excusable – even playing the race card, and the Muslim card, and the gender card, and every sleazy gambit that the politics of fear can come up with. This is how they have arrested the Obama juggernaut. It’s the only game they know how to play.

Oklahomans for Equality has published Oklahoma Sally Kern's written response to the furor that has arisen over her wildly homophobic remarks caught on a recording while Ms. Kern though she was off the record with a small group of fellow bigots. Kern's reponse can be found here (http://okeq.org/kernresponse.cfm). In the process of trying to make herself seem the victim and give the appearance that it was the "homosexual activists" who were in the wrong, Kern made this comment:

“To put this simply, as a Christian I believe homosexuality is not moral. Obviously, you have the right as an American to choose that lifestyle, but I also have the right to express my views and my fellow Oklahomans have the right to debate these issues. “In recent years homosexual activists have begun to aggressively promote their agenda through the political process, . . . That is their right, just as it is my right to voice opposition to their agenda, which I have been asked to do at several public forums in recent months. That’s what democracy is all about. It appears some homosexual activists believe only one group is allowed a voice in this debate. I disagree.

The remainder of her press release is basically a lot of unrepentant blather. Many people are not buying what Kern is selling and a petition has been started calling for her resignation. The petition sign up can be found here: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/333266961. Pam Spaulding has a great letter authored by Rev. Russell Mark, who is actively involved with the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (www.wabaptists.org). This letter, while blames Kern and those like her for the increase in hate crimes against gays can be found here: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4735. Given Kern's ignorant nastiness, I also sent her the following letter myself:

Dear Ms. Kern:

I guess under your definition, I am a “homosexual activist” because I find your recent anti-gay remarks bigoted, moronic and reprehensible. It is true – at least until you and those with your mindset take over the nation – we have the right to differ on matters of religious beliefs, but that is not an excuse for your recitation of factually erroneous statements. I would also add that your so-called “vigorous debate” was in a small closed session hidden from view. That’s hardly a vigorous debate and you know it. Please don’t lie about it. Thus, what I find truly offensive is the utter ignorance and dishonesty displayed in your remarks. You have certainly done your part to make the citizens of Oklahoma look like fools both in the USA and internationally. I have a few brief additional points I’d like to make.

First, as a history major, I suggest you take some refresher courses IMMEDIATELY. Perhaps a few courses on Classical Greece and Rome, each of which by any calculation lasted far longer that the USA has to date, might be a good starting point to show the erroneousness of your comment “Studies show, no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted for more than, you know, a few decades.” I might also add that individuals like Socrates, Plato, Alexander the Great, numerous successful Roman Emperors, are but a few of the contributors to western civilization who were involved in same sex love. Please know what you are talking about before running your mouth.

Second, some of your other comments also suggest you rely on those like Paul Cameron for ”expert” opinion on gays and our “lifestyle.” Not that I realized, living, breathing and having emotions, feelings and bleeding when cut constituted a “lifestyle.” I suppose you engage in a heterosexual “lifestyle” under your feeble reasoning. By your apparent analysis, you were not born heterosexual, but rather chose that “lifestyle.” Again, you show your ignorance since Cameron was exposed as a fraud some 28 years ago. True, disingenuous “pro-family” organizations continue to disseminate lies based on his fraudulent work, yet one would think an elected official such as yourself would make sure that your statements had some shred of truth to them. I would also suggest you review the newly released booklet compiled by the American Psychological Association and other LEGITIMATE experts on sexual orientation. You can find it here: http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.pdfLastly, your comments were particularly outrageous in light of the recent murders of gays. In one case, a 15 year old boy was basically executed by a middle school student who obviously had been indoctrinated by people like you. You see, words do have consequences. You are little better than the Nazi regime who made similar remarks about Jews in the 1930’s to dehumanize and stigmatize them. We all know what that led to – well, perhaps not since history is obviously NOT your strong suit. Check out the Holocaust while you are doing your history refresher courses. Good “Christians” like you have a great deal of blood and guilt on your hands for every gay, lesbian or trans-gendered individual who has been brutalized or murdered based on simple minded hate like that which your remarks exhibited. I hope you will do some soul searching. If not, at least educate yourself so you do not show yourself to be an ignorant ass.

The London Ontario office of SNAP, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, sent me an e-mail concerning this television show. I am not sure how widely Golbal is disseminated, but decided to post about it since (1) I am a frequent critic of the Roman Catholic Church's failure to remove high level clerics who covered up and/or enabled sexual predatory priests and (2) I know I have a number of regular readers in various parts of Canada. SNAP's interest in the show is that one of the new episodes looks at a Roman Catholic Priest who molests children. Here are some details:

Very Bad Men Returns to Global Television All New Second Season Starts March 18 @ 10 pm (March 5, 2008 – Vancouver, BC.) Episode 8: Sins of the Father – A friendly priest is dubbed “Father Feeler” by dozens of young girls, and is finally brought to justice by the women who could not forget their past.

Translate This Page

Contact Me to Order Title Work

LGBT Legal Services

About Me

Out gay attorney in a committed relationship; formerly married and father of three wonderful children; sometime activist and political/news junkie; survived coming out in mid-life and hope to share my experiences and reflections with others.
In the career/professional realm, I am affiliated with Caplan & Associates PC where I practice in the areas of real estate, estate planning (Wills, Trusts, Advanced Medical Directives, Financial Powers of Attorney, Durable Medical Powers of Attorney); business law and commercial transactions; formation of corporations and limited liability companies and legal services to the gay, lesbian and transgender community, including birth certificate amendment.

Disclaimer on Opinions and Content

This Blog contains content that may be innapropriate for readers under the legal age of 18. IF YOU ARE UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE, PLEASE LEAVE NOW. Thank you

This is an opinion and commentary blog and the opinions and contents of this Blog - including opinions expressed concerning opponents of LGBT equality - are the opinions only of the individual blogger and should not be attributed to any other individuals or to any organization of which the blogger is a past or current member.

Followers

Michael-in-Norfolk disclaims any and all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, completeness, legality, reliability, operability, or availability of information or material displayed on this site and does not claim credit for any images or articles featured on this site, unless otherwise noted. All visual content is copyrighted to it's respectful owners. Information on this site may contain errors or inaccuracies, and Michael-in-Norfolk does not make warranty as to the correctness or reliability of the site's content. If you own rights to any of the images or articles, and do not wish them to appear on this site, please contact Michael-in-Norfolk via e-mail and they will be promptly removed. Michael-in-Norfolk contains links to other Internet sites. These links are provided solely as a convenience and are not endorsements of any products or services in such sites, and no information or content in such site has been endorsed or approved by this blog.